Chusak, along with Phanom and S.J. Toon, openly confronted a clip asserting authority, revealing the Pheu Thai Executive Committee's resolution to file a complaint with the Election Commission for election law violations, citing harm to the party and impact on popularity. S.J. Toon admitted fear but insisted on upholding justice.
At 10:35 a.m. on 5 Feb 2026 GMT+7, Chusak Sirinil, Deputy Leader of Pheu Thai Party and head of the legal team, together with Phanom Pho-kaew, Pheu Thai candidate for Kanchanaburi Constituency 5, Anon Thanomwong, former Kanchanaburi Provincial Administrative Organization member for District 2, and Norawit La-laeng, Pheu Thai party-list candidate, held a joint press conference at Pheu Thai Party headquarters concerning an audio clip violating election law involving an MP candidate in Kanchanaburi province.
Chusak stated the clip contained inappropriate speech potentially undermining the democratic monarchy system. Those involved denied the voice was theirs, claiming it was AI-generated. Phanom informed the party that Pheu Thai had suffered damage and urged appropriate action. The party assessed the clip as violating multiple election law articles. Since those involved denied the voice, Pheu Thai arranged for the individuals in the clip to explain its context publicly for further consideration.
. Phanom said he came forward because he felt harmed. The clip circulating on social media included statements claiming the speaker's party would definitely form the government, while his party would be the opposition. It further said that if he became an MP, locals would receive nothing because the opposition would not get budget approval for local projects. The speaker also emphasized that the Bhumjaithai Party is very cruel, using harsh language. Such remarks could sway his supporters to change allegiance, fearing no benefit would come if they voted for him. This compelled him to hold the press conference.
. Anon stated that he recorded the clip using his mobile phone. On 22 Dec 2025 at about 08:46 a.m. GMT+7, he was with Preecha Jirawongsutharmon, former mayor of Pilok Subdistrict, Kanchanaburi. Preecha received a call requesting to speak with Anon, though Anon was uncertain about the purpose. Prior reports mentioned threats, so he recorded the conversation to protect himself. After listening, he shared the clip with several friends to determine if it violated election law since it was during the MP election period. Preecha confirmed the caller's voice in the clip belonged to the person appearing in the recording.
. Chusak summarized that the individual called to speak, and S.J. Toon (Anon) understood it concerned the election. Given previous threats suggesting problems for those not voting a certain way, he recorded the call and shared it with relevant parties for review. Subsequently, Phanom requested Pheu Thai to take legal action, and the party found the clip violated multiple election law provisions. These included false accusations, promises of benefits, and misleading voters about MP candidates' popularity—offenses under Section 73 of the 2018 Organic Act on the Election of Members of the House of Representatives.
. At the Pheu Thai Executive Committee meeting on 4 Feb 2026, it was resolved to file a complaint with the Election Commission to investigate and prosecute those involved in the clip for causing damage. Norawit La-laeng, Pheu Thai party-list candidate, was assigned to submit the complaint to the EC at 2:00 p.m. today.
When asked if S.J. Toon could confirm whether the voice in the clip belonged to Sakda, who filed a complaint denying it was his voice, Anon said the phone owner who gave him the call was the same name and called several times to ask for help in campaigning, though no threats occurred. The caller's number likely belonged to an associate of a known subdistrict administrative organization chief. The call was probably because the former S.J. wanted support from Anon for votes in the area.
Regarding whether the audio clip could serve as legal evidence, Norawit said the former S.J. provided the clip with a transcript affidavit as evidence, which will be submitted to the Election Commission for investigation. As for the claim that the voice was AI-generated, Norawit said this must be verified, but the person who spoke on the call confirmed the voice. When asked whether the party considered possible violations of Section 112 (lese-majeste) in the clip, Chusak said the party is currently reviewing this and will decide later, though the clip likely contains several questionable remarks.
Following the clip’s release, local residents expressed concern. Phanom said many asked if voting for him and being in the opposition would indeed prevent budget allocation. People were worried and shocked, causing potential supporters to reconsider. Both phone inquiries and field questions indicated the clip's impact on his popularity, as it clearly tried to sway his supporters. He held the press conference because the opposing party in the clip filed a complaint claiming the voice was AI-generated, risking public perception that he fabricated the clip to boost popularity, which could backfire without fact verification.
When asked if he feared any consequences after the press conference, Phanom said he was not afraid since he works for the benefit of the people, acts with good intentions, and does not intend harm. He emphasized his political work aims to solve public issues and reiterated he is not afraid. Anon admitted he is afraid but prioritizes correctness. He stated that he has long been involved in politics and wants local politics and the community to develop, as Phanom has done effectively. Such incidents had never occurred before and this is a first.
Asked whether individual offenses could implicate the affiliated party, Chusak said, it likely could involve the party since it is known that members violated the law. Pheu Thai assigned Norawit to file the complaint with the Election Commission first, while other party matters are under consideration. He added this is a political matter; the nature of the politics involved needs examination. If illegal, the party will exercise its rights. Allowing such actions unchecked would erode respect and enable state power to compromise election fairness. The Executive Committee therefore resolved to pursue legal action under election law.
